Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Lalit vs State Of Rajasthan on 2 May, 2023
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 1253/2022
Lalit S/o Sh. Rampal, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Bhopalgarh Dist.
Jodhpur Raj. (Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail Pratapgarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Purohit
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
02/05/2023
The instant application for suspension of sentence under
Section 389 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the appellant/
applicant Lalit S/o Sh. Rampal who has been convicted and
sentenced for the offence under Sections 8/15 and 8/25 of the
NDPS Act and sentenced with fifteen years' RI with fine of Rs.
1,50,000/-and in default of payment of fine to additional undergo
five months' RI and under Section 8/25 Fifteen years' RI with fine
of Rs. 1,50,000/- and in default of payment of fine to additional
undergo five months' RI.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that patently a
false case has been foisted against the appellant rather he has not
committed any offence alleged by the prosecution. The
circumstances created by the Police team in this matter brings
the recovery into doubt. As per Exhibit P/18, the 'Parcha Kayami'
when the vehicle was intercepted by the Police team on highway,
(2 of 4) [SOSA-1253/2022]
it is alleged that the vehicle and the persons apprehended there
taken to the police station which as per check FIR Exhibit P/29
was around 1km. from the place of alleged interseption. He
submits that the sanctity of the seizure made in the premises of
Police Station is highly doubtful and no explanation furnished by
the team members as to why the search and seizure was not
made at the place where the vehicle was intercepted. It is further
submitted that after interception of the vehicle and upon
perceiving suspicious circumstances, if the vehicle and the person
found at the spot were taken to the police station, then there was
ample time for the seizing officer to call for the superior officer or
to call a nearest Magistrate and to obtain a warrant for search and
seizure but, that has not been done and thus, entire process of
recovery vitiates on this count because of non compliance of
Section 42 of NDPS Act. It is emanating from the recovery that
the Police station premises is situated in the highly populated
area and presence of independent persons was very much
available but despite availability of independent witnesses, the
same were not called which puts a dent in the genuineness of the
story. The appellant is behind the bars from last five years and
the trial is to take time. Therefore, the application for suspension
of sentence may kindly be allowed.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application
for suspension of sentence.
Upon consideration of the submissions, a serious dispute
has been raised with regard to the genuineness of allegation thus,
embargo contained under Section 37 of the NDPS act would not
(3 of 4) [SOSA-1253/2022]
be a fetter in granting bail to the appellant, therefore, this Court
deems it proper to allow the suspension of Sentence.
Accordingly, the application for suspension of sentences filed
under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the
sentences passed by the learned Special Judge, NDPS Cases,
Pratapgarh in Special Session Case NO. 39/2018 vide judgment
dated 30.5.2022 against the appellant-applicant Lalit S/o Shri
Rampal shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid
appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Thousand
Only) with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees: Twenty Five
Thosuand Only) to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for his
appearance in this Court on 01.6.2023 and whenever ordered to
do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated
below:-
1. That he will appear before the trial Court in the
month of January of every year till the appeal is
decided.
2. That if the applicant changes the place of
residence, he will give in writing his changed
address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel
in the High Court.
3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s),
they will give in writing their changed address to
the trial Court.
The learned trial Court shall keep the record of
attendance of the accused-applicant in a separate file. Such file be
registered as Criminal Misc. Case related to original case in which
the accused-applicant was tried and convicted. A copy of this
order shall also be placed in that file for ready reference. Criminal
Misc. file shall not be taken into account for statistical purpose
(4 of 4) [SOSA-1253/2022]
relating to pendency and disposal of cases in the trial court. In
case the said accused applicant does not appear before the trial
court, the learned trial Judge shall report the matter to the High
Court for cancellation of bail.
(FARJAND ALI),J
ns. 90-1/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
